2. The judgment of the Defendant is against the mistake while committing the instant crime, and the amount of damage to each victim is large.

subsection (b) of this section.

In the court below, 20 victims have been repaid to 14 victims among 20 victims, and 5 victims have been paid to the victims in the first instance and most damages have been recovered.

Some victims have agreed to reach an agreement.

However, the crime of this case is very poor because the defendant, who sold goods or admission tickets to many unspecified victims on the Internet camera bulletin board, obtained the price by fraud.

On July 13, 2017, the Defendant was punished five times by a fine due to the crime of fraud under the same law as the instant crime. On July 13, 2017, the Seoul Western District Court sentenced the Defendant to the suspension of the execution of imprisonment for eight months due to fraud, etc., and the judgment became final and conclusive on July 21, 2017. The Defendant began to commit the instant crime of this case under the same law as the instant crime, even if he was under the suspension of the execution, the Defendant was sentenced to the advance of the suspension of the execution.

It is necessary to strictly punish the defendant as it seems that such defendant significantly lacks compliance consciousness and effort to prevent recidivism.

In full view of the circumstances seen above, the sentencing of the lower court exceeded the reasonable bounds of discretion, taking into account the following circumstances: the Defendant’s age, sexual conduct, environment, motive and circumstance leading to the instant crime, and circumstances before and after the instant crime.

It is difficult to view that maintaining the sentencing of the lower court as it is is unfair, even if considering the circumstances alleged by the Defendant on the grounds of appeal and the fact that additional damages have been recovered in the appellate court.

Ultimately, the lower court’s punishment is appropriate and appropriate.